General call for proposals awarded applications

Download 1.69 Mb.
Date conversion18.07.2017
Size1.69 Mb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   69

Please note that the project Summary was provided by the Applicant in the Application Form


Registration number of the Application:


Name of the applicant organisation:


Project title:

Advancing the ballistic laboratory data of firearms capability of the CSI Division of Hellenic Police

Member State where the applicant organisation is registered:


Duration of the project (months):


Co beneficiaries of the grant:

Ministry of Citizen Protection, European and Development Programmes Division EL

Associate partners/not co-beneficiaries of the grant:


Characteristics of the Project :


Summary (REF APPLICATION FORM: 2.1.9):

The present proposal addresses the development of an integrated solution that will aid the Hellenic Police Criminal Investigation Division to perform advanced forensic activities in crime scene environments with ballistic data of firearms.

To this end the proposal foresees :

i. To improve forensic analysis in ballistic data of firearms conditions

ii. Specifically train the personnel to develop advanced knowledge on ballistic data specific issues and responsibilities.

iii. Produce a specific manual on evaluating training of personnel that could be transferred to EU MS.

iv. Enhance the operational capacity of HP/CID to detect a vast array of firearms, cartridges and bullets.

v. Perform training of the Hellenic Police Criminal Investigation Division personnel to fully exploit the advanced capabilities of the proposed solutions and

iv. Provide an EU added value to the project, through a series of specific activities including focused workshops and targeted visits to exchange know-how and expertise to related EU Laboratories

The completed outcome of the proposed action will contribute to the capacity building of the Hellenic Police Criminal Investigation Division through the enhancement of ballistic data forensic analysis whilst at the same time reducing the uncertainties in the analysis.

The participating entities of this action are the MoCP's Center for Security Studies and the Crime Investigation Division of Hellenic Police which by constitutional law is responsible for conducting forensic investigation in Greece.

The implementation of the proposal will be implemented through a following set of activities focused on the following phases:

Phase 1: Management (M1-M24)

• Contact with EU authorities


• Financial Auditing

Phase 2: Preparatory Activities (M1-M6)

• Operational requirements and infrastructure specifications

• Contact with EU Law enforcement agencies

Phase 3: Acquisition of infrastructure (M6-M12)

• Acquisition of infrastructure

• Installation

Acceptance tests

Phase 4: Training Activities (M11-M18)

• Training activities

Phase 5: Data exchange structure and infrastructure (M5-M21)

• Definition of data exchange protocols

• Developing / Enhancing existing databases

Phase 6: Standardization process and Legal issues (M12-M24)

• Certification process

• Legal and data privacy issues

Phase 7: Dissemination (M6-M24)

• Web-site section in the Hellenic Police CID web-site

• Targeted visits to EU Law enforcement agencies

• Brochures / CD with referenced material

• Publications on ballistic data of firearms forensics Manuals

Total eligible costs of the project (EUR)


Max. grant awarded (EUR)


Max. % of EU co-financing



TOTAL SCORE: 66 points

Final grant awarded: 298.789,86


1. Overall conclusion:

Overall the project’s subject matter falls under the objectives of the Programme and the specific priority of the Call on the prevention, investigation, and prosecution on illegal trafficking in firearms. However, its primary aim is clearly national: the development of an integrated solution that will help the Greek Police Criminal Investigation Division to perform advanced forensic activities in crime scene environments with ballistic data of firearms.

Its specific aims concern the development of standardized methods for the collection and processing of profile data that will be the basis of the Greek National automated recognition and identification systems. Its operational development is well addressed as well as training activities. But the technological capability building is not fully elaborated.

The project doesn’t reflect an innovative methodology or activity but presents a classical infrastructure acquisition process. The 7 WS structure is adequate for implementing it. The time frame of 24 months is ideally suitable but depends on the timely implementation of the infrastructure whose specifications and bidding procedure may take more time. The proposal is jointly submitted by two entities of the Greek Ministry of Citizen Protection, KEMEA (the ministry’s R&D entity) and EDPD (European projects management entity) who will both perform the project management activities. However, even if the project managers are qualified and experimented, the number of workdays allocated is too low (48 days) for conducting the activities and raises the question of whether the partnership possesses the adequate operational capacities of the project management and coordination. There is also some subcontracting to external institutions (whose identity is not provided) of activities like dissemination and certification. However the budget presents dissemination tasks as activities of staff to be specifically recruited and not subcontracted. The subcontracting and/or highly remuneration of dissemination costs are unjustified. Also the budget doesn’t fully justify all the equipment costs. Regarding the EU, the project plans to increase the ballistic data capabilities of Greece to the level of other EU countries, develop databases compliant with those of EU countries and establish best practices to be transferred to MSs facing similar financial and capacity problems as Greece. Overall it can impact on ISEC’s objective of combatting illegal firearms trafficking but the primary impact is expected to be on the Greek Police Criminal Investigation Division and national ballistic data of firearms enforcement agencies. In sum the operational capability building aspects of this project are well addressed and relevant, but its technical and European dimensions need further developments.

2. What are the strengths of the proposal:

- Its awareness of the needs of the Greek ballistic identification field

- Its knowledge of the topic -Its operational and juridical capacity

- Its attention paid to data protection questions

- The appropriateness of its methodology for infrastructure acquisition

- Its aim of increasing the level of Greek ballistic field to that of the EU LEAs’.

3. What are the weaknesses of the proposal:
- Its overwhelming national priorities which can undermine its European impact

- The lack of a sound presentation of its technological aspects

- Its budget which comprises unjustified high costs

- Its management structure where the 2 partners’ project managers do not work enough days for fulfilling this task

4. Comments on the Budget:

The total amount requested from the Commission is 584.119, 00 Eur. The greatest portion of this amount is dedicated to equipment costs. Equipment costs concern automated testing system and ballistic analysis comparative microscopes etc. whose relevance for the topic seem justified. However the prices are high and it is difficult to assess their relative value as there is no comparison of prices provided by different suppliers.

Staff costs are kept at minimum as the majority of staff is working either overtime (project managers of KEMEA and EDPD) or as part of normal tasks (lab organization, training, certification). Those specifically employed are all allocated the same amount for daily rates (200E) and it is just their number of workdays which differ from each other. However, it is noticeable that the highest salary goes to the staff in charge of dissemination (32.000 Euro for 160 days) which doesn’t seem so justified when the project managers work less days than the dissemination staff’s (only 48 days for project managers and 160 days for dissemination). This is problematic as the most important task of is project management and, if it is not fully implemented how would the project be properly managed?

The travels cover 4 coordination meetings (flight + DSA) but the destinations are not defined. There are also information collection travels whose meaning is unclear and destinations not defined as well.

Equipment costs are the highest costs of the project. They cover the fully automated system of comparative test at 120.000, 00 Euro (without VAT, depreciation for 18 months), ballistic analysis comparative microscopes (80.000 Euro), stereoscopes (5000 Euro) etc. These equipment seem relevant for the Ministry of Interior but the project doesn’t precise whether they will stay in the premises of the project at the end of its life cycle, given to the Ministry of Interior or sold. Also it doesn’t clearly demonstrate that all are necessary for the strict performance of project activities. There is also no comparison of prices from different suppliers to see who offers the best value for money. There is no attached offer or quote per listed equipment. Moreover 50.000 Euro are dedicated to subcontracting for procedure certification, but the budget doesn’t identify the certification institute. It also assigns a certification tasks to EDPD staff without clarifying the differences of these two certification activities. Publication and dissemination costs comprise brochure, CD, project booklet production and translation. The translation costs are kept at maximum (45 Euro) but the language is not defined.

1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   69

The database is protected by copyright © 2017
send message

    Main page